• treadful@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s almost impossible to spot by people looking directly at the code. I’m honestly surprised this one was discovered at all. People are still trying to deconstruct this exploit to figure out how the RCE worked.

      And supply chain attacks are effectively impossible to eliminate as an attack vector by a developer-user of a N-level dependency. Not having dependencies or auditing every dependency is unreasonable in most cases.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        There are sysadmins that discover a major vulnerabilities though troubleshooting

        The key is the number of people involved

          • 4z01235@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            2 years ago

            Generate the binaries during test execution from known (version controlled) inputs, plaintext files and things. Don’t check binaries into source control, especially not intentionally corrupt ones that other maintainers and observers don’t know what they may contain.

      • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Right now the greatest level of supply chain secuirty that I know of is formal verification, source reproducible builds, and full source bootstrapping build systems. There was a neat FPGA bootstrapping proj3ct (the whole toolchain to program the fpga could be built on the FPGA) at last years FOSDEMs conference, and I have to admit the idea of a physically verifiable root of trust is super exciting to me, but also out of reach for 98% of projects (though more possible by the day).